Brainstorm methods

Early on it became clear that there are several thousands of documents with all kinds of brainstorm- and idea generation methods. Choices for which methods to possibly include in the pilots were based on a total of three factors:

•Information gathered in BAAT Medical Analysis

It was made clear what BAAT Medical wanted to be treated in the sessions since they were asked to pinpoint the elements of which they thought that would enhance the level of creativity and innovation. This information was used as requirements for the selection of methods.

• Opinions of other students and mentors

Reviewing all kinds of methods with other people created a clear view of which methods were feasible, not only within BAAT Medical but as brainstorm methods themselves.

•Gut-feeling

During the time spend at BAAT Medical a lot of aspects like the way employees work and how projects are conducted became clear. These observations created a gut-feeling for which methods would possibly work and which would not. The mentors of BAAT Medical made clear that this gut- feeling should not be ignored since mastering the science of ‘creativity and innovation’ in primarily the first stage of the assignment (the literature review) gives way to making those choices.

The methods which were chosen out of the large amount of available methods differ in their approach, purpose, and their level of exoticness. With the latter is meant that there is a difference between more classical methods and those who treat a more radical and/or novel approach.

In result a total of 15 different methods were selected for becoming treated in the pilots. Whether they were actually used in the pilots or not depended on multiple factors, consisting of for example the problem statement(s) of project, opinion of the problem initiators, and the phase in which the project was at that time. The different methods are shortly described below. Elaborated versions, including the different steps within the method, can be found in the Annex, paragraph 12.3, page 84 .

Method 1: Rewording the problem

This method forces one to look at the problem from different views. It often happens that the problem for which solutions need to be found is not well formulated. This can set people in the wrong direction when confronted with the problem. A great advantage of this method is that all group members can become aware of the actual problem. Were people ‘just following the problem statement’ earlier on, now they are more aware of what the problem consists off. By questioning some valuable words of the problem statement, it can become clear that the customer demand differs from the problem statement. More of this method in paragraph 12.3.1, page 84.

Method 2: Breakdown

A method for reframing the problem statement. Through breaking down the sentence and analyzing each word a team can find a new, and better, problem statement which can be more focused on the

real demand of the customer. The method consists of five sequential steps, as can be seen in paragraph 12.3.2, page 84.

Method 3: PSI (Problem – Stimulus – Idea)

The first phase of the method of PSI is great for reframing your problem statement. Looking critically at what defines success creates possibilities for changing the problem statement and thereby its focus for the project. It consists of the first two steps of the method, both elaborated in paragraph 12.3.3, page 85.

Method 4: Problem Statement Analysis

Within this method the team analyses whether the customer’s demand (often given in the form of a single sentence or question) is really what the customer wants. It often happens that the customer thinks he wants a solution in the form of a product which works in a particular way. However, after asking some targeted questions, the product designer can propose a new direction in which a solution can be found. This can differ a lot from the original customer’s demand, but still tackles the entire problem. The method consists of three steps, each treating two or three questions, see paragraph 12.3.4, page 86.

Method 5: Morphological Analysis

Morphological analysis is an idea generation method that let participants find the structural aspects of a problem and study relationships within them. For example, take the problem of finding the right motorized/powered vehicle transport from location A to location B. The structural aspects of the problem are, for example, the type of vehicle (e.g. car, motorcycle); the source of power (e.g. electrical motor, steam); and the medium (e.g. air, tarmac). Combining those creates, for example, a scooter on water, driven by a steam engine. As the example states, some novel combinations are possible. The five sequential steps are visible in paragraph 12.3.5, page 86.

Method 6: Reverse Thinking

Like the name suggests, instead of thinking about a problem in known and logical manners, here we reverse it and think about the opposite solutions and/or create the problem or worsen it. For example: “How can I triple my sales?” can be changed into “How can I make sure I have no sales at all?” It is found that the majority of participants find it easier to produce ideas for the ‘negative challenge’, simply because it is much more fun. More in paragraph 12.3.6, page 87.

Method 7: Questioning Assumptions

The majority of industries have the unspoken and deeply held belief that everyone and everything works in order to get things done. By doing so, they fail to question assumptions during the process of product development (Kelley & Kelley, 2003). These assumptions restrict the possibilities and ideas. This method can serve two goals. Firstly, it can determine whether the customer demand really treats the problem he wants a solution for. It is also possible that the customer was already

Methods Analysis each assumption (and thus word or combination of words) in the customer’s demand. Secondly, it can be of influence when the design team is already busy coming up with ideas. In this situation designers can create (false) assumptions when treating this problem statement. To treat this goal, clarify the assumptions made when exemplifying a created design. Even if these are sketches, it is good to question the assumption made since the team can benefit from it as a whole. More of this method (e.g. different areas in which assumptions are made) in paragraph 12.3.7, page 87.

Method 8: S.C.A.M.P.E.R.

Scamper is a mnemonic that stands for Substitute, Combine, Adapt, Modify, Puttoanotheruse, Eliminate, and Reverse. With this method one is able to improve a product to new needs or finding better solutions to the problem. It also can be used for the development of new products. Using the tool requires asking questions about existing products, using each of the seven prompts above. This method mostly results in a session with many debates and discussions, rather than a number of designs through drawings. The prompts can be found in paragraph 12.3.8 page 88.

Method 9: Attribute Listing

Attribute listing is a de-compositional approach where a product is broken down into smaller parts that can be examined individually. Through examining all the different parts the team is able to see into detail what the product consists of (both physical and their attributes with values) and what can be altered to serve the problem statement. The four different steps of this method can be found in paragraph 12.3.9, page 89.

Method 10: The 5 Why’s

This method explores the cause-and-effect relationships underlying a particular problem since problems are tackled more sustainably when they are addressed at the source. As the name suggests this method consists of five why’s. The method is further explained in paragraph 12.3.10, page 90.

Method 11: Business Process Re-engineering (BPR)

Consisting of 20 different questions, it dissects a product to its core functionality by asking what, where, when, who, and how things are done. The method is only useful when a product needs alteration or a comparable product (which serves as inspiration) needs clarification. The different questions can be found in paragraph 12.3.11, page 91.

Method 12: Brainwriting

This method is used to generate ideas in a group setting. Participants draw ideas on a piece of paper and after passing on the paper to another participant they are to supplement the drawings of the previous participant. It is a method which forces people to work from the ideas of others. The method is further elaborated in paragraph 12.3.12, page 91.

Method 13: Post-up

First the level of detail revealing is determined (and thus limitations in ideation later on in the session) since it is of influence to the potential level of creativity of the participants. For example, when participants are faced with a problem with many specifications, and thus limitations, they have to find solutions in a very narrow area. However, are they introduced to the problem with a low level of information, than they can think more freely and creative since there are fewer limitations. Next up is the phase in which individuals generate as much ideas as possible with the use of post-its. The different levels of detail revealing and steps in drawing ideas are treated in paragraph 12.3.13, page 92.

Method 14: Image-ination

This method focuses on the use of (random) images since they have the ability to create new relationships and associations. It consists of assembling a collection of images (without words) that are either related to the problem or have no relationship with the problem at all (random images). Then participants try to find similarities between the pictures and the problem at hand. More of this in paragraph 12.3.14, page 93.

Method 15: Mind mapping

A mind map is a method to visually organize information, gathered by all participants. It is often created around one single concept/problem, positioned in the center, to which associated presentations of ideas are added. The most important and major ideas are directly connected to the central concept. Other ideas branch out from those ideas. It results in a spider web in which all there is known about the concept is presented. Elaboration of the method is found in paragraph 12.3.15, page 94.